This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: Remove self-assignments

From: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>
To: Richard Biener <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>
Cc: Marc Glisse <marc dot glisse at inria dot fr>, gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2013 09:42:55 -0600
Subject: Re: Remove self-assignments
References: <alpine dot DEB dot 2 dot 02 dot 1306091817340 dot 24602 at stedding dot saclay dot inria dot fr> <51B76E51 dot 5070001 at redhat dot com> <alpine dot DEB dot 2 dot 10 dot 1306112118580 dot 28144 at stedding dot saclay dot inria dot fr> <CAFiYyc3nqva-5P1qPS2TU5zBGbpXSoOASrWkQYfStt8ZbOJy4g at mail dot gmail dot com>

On 06/12/13 02:03, Richard Biener wrote:


DSE looks like the right place to me as we are removing a store.  Yes,
DCE removes a limited set of stores as well, but the way we remove this kind
of store makes it much more suited to DSE.

As of possibly trapping/throwing stores, we do not bother to preserve those
(even with -fnon-call-exceptions).

A bit of a surprise to hear that. I don't mind much though, as-fnon-call-exceptions isn't something I find terribly useful.


Consider my "objections" withdrawn.
Jeff

Follow-Ups:
- Re: Remove self-assignments
  - From: Jakub Jelinek

References:
- Remove self-assignments
  - From: Marc Glisse
- Re: Remove self-assignments
  - From: Jeff Law
- Re: Remove self-assignments
  - From: Marc Glisse
- Re: Remove self-assignments
  - From: Richard Biener

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]